linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: Expose MSRs to userspace

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 17 Nov 2006 10:17:56 +0200
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
CC:	kvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	uril@...ranet.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: Expose MSRs to userspace

Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 09:20:49 +0200
> Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com> wrote:
>
>   
>>>> +out_vcpu:
>>>> +	vcpu_put(vcpu);
>>>> +
>>>> +	return rc;
>>>> +}
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> This function returns no indication of how many msrs it actually did set. 
>>> Should it?
>>>   
>>>       
>> It can't hurt.  Is returning the number of msrs set in the return code 
>> (ala short write) acceptable, or do I need to make this a read/write ioctl?
>>
>>     
>
> I'd have thought that you'd just copy the number written into msrs->nmsrs via
>
> 	msrs->nmsrs = num_entries;
>
> like kvm_dev_ioctl_set_msrs() does.  Dunno...
>   

It means making it an _IOWR() ioctl, but no matter.

-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/